Blacks on twitter threaten random violence

In light of the Zimmerman verdict, as predicted, blacks as of this hour are not only rioting in at least five cities, but are behaving quite badly on Twitter.  They’re promising to loot, rape, burn and and even kill people.  And nevermind that Zimmerman isn’t even white (but mestizo), blacks are threatening violence against whites too!  Gotta love diversity!

Here is but a small sample of things that were re-tweeted on Twitter over the past 30 minutes:

[N.B.  You might want to skip to the updates at the end of this post.]

Continue reading

Human Nature vs. Hollywood Political Correctness

Frank Salter’s recent series of articles on the war against human nature got me to thinking about Hollywood’s undeclared war against human nature and reality.  It often seems to be the case that if reality is X then Hollywood’s prescription will be not X.

Traditionally, stereotypes are in accordance with reality.  Like oral epic poetry, traditional stereotypes are the accumulation of generational wisdom of various folkways. Unhappy with the reality of the stereotypes, however, many Cultural Marxists began in the mid 20th century to try to reverse these stereotypes, the idea being that if the stereotype is reversed, so reality will be reversed.  Hollywood has  followed suit.

Examples of Hollywood representations contrary to reality:

– The dumb blonde.  This really goes back to post-WWII anxiety.  Unfortunately for Hollywood, countries with high percentages of blonds, such as Sweden or Norway, have some of the highest average IQs on the planet.

– Evil Germans.  Perhaps no single group has been more denigrated by Hollywood than Germans or people of German ancestry.  The epitome of falsehood of this fiction is the creation of the “German terrorist” in movies such as Die Hard.

– The wise negro.  In this fiction, whites are lost and without guidance but along comes a “wise negro” to give advice and direction.  Morgan Freeman has made an entire career out of this character.  Has anyone ever met a white person in real life guided by a “wise negro”?

– Widespread miscegenation.  Although miscegenation is now more common than it was 50 years ago, it’s still statistically rare in reality but extremely overrepresented in movies.

– Violent white criminals.  Although there are violent white criminals, blacks make up 13% of the US population but commit around 59% of felony homicides.  Violent whites are overrepresented and violent blacks underrepresented in movies.

– The evil rich WASP.  Although there still are rich WASPs, WASPs are no longer the elite in control of the USA; Ashkenazis are, yet they’re never vilified.

– Over-representation of non-whites in period pieces.  In the 1960 census, the USA was 90% white.  But from period pieces of the early 20th century, one would infer that the USA was around 50% non-white.

– Smart black judges and doctors putting dumb whites in their place.  Given the average IQ of blacks, this is comical.

– Whites sexually taking advantage of  blacks. Odd considering: “In the United States in 2005, 37,460 white females were sexually assaulted or raped by a black man, while between zero and ten black females were sexually assaulted or raped by a white man.”

– Peaceful Amerindians.  As discovered by Lawrence Keeley, many Amerindians were committing genocide against each other prior to contact with Europeans.

– Peaceful Muslims misunderstood by violent Westerners.

– Swarthy females, such as Kim Kardashian, peddled as the epitome of female beauty, when, as Peter Frost has shown, the overwhelming preference is for fair females.

Pathologically altruistic beta males getting the ladies.  Chateau Heartiste can show you this is not true.

– Nordic-looking dumb villains, outsmarted by swarthier-looking smarter outsiders.

– Too uptight whites (exercising good impulse control?) who need to follow more free-flowing (poor impulse control?) blacks in order to loosen up.

– Third World immigration enriching Western countries (although in reality ruining Western countries).  This is a relatively new representation but one that will continue to grow.

While these false representations created by Hollywood won’t overturn human nature, they can certainly do damage and confuse many people.  For instance, many Americans and foreigners, when asked the percentage of the USA they believe to be black, will answer around 50%, which is probably due to the over-representation of blacks in movies.

Please add other false representations in the comments below and I’ll add them to the list.


– “Multiracial gangs, or at least multiracial criminals working together (like, one burglar is white and his buddy is black). In reality organized crime tends to be segregated.”

Are Women Who Tan Sluts?”

95% of White Americans Have No African Ancestry

According to some recent population genetics surveys, around 95% of white Americans (European Americans) have no black (Sub-Sahara African) ancestry.  And the 5% of whites who do, seem to have only a trivial amount.

Nonetheless, the average admixture of African Americans seems to be around 80% black and 20% European.

What does this mean?

First, the USA historically has not been a hotbed of miscegenation as Cultural Marxists like to tell us.  Your eyes and common sense should tell you that if there were widespread miscegenation, there would be hardly any white Americans but rather large mestizo/mulatto-like populations such as one finds in many Latin American countries (and even there, small white upper classes still exist).

Second, the people in USA tended to cross the color line in only one direction: white —> black. Mulatto people would identify as black and then reintegrate into the black gene pool.

Which brings us to another question, why do mulattoes almost always identify as black?

The standard Cultural Marxist answer to this question is because of culture, such as the one-drop rule.  But the reality of the situation belies this half-truth.

The most straightforward answer is what Oxford zoologist Jonathan Kingdon suggested in 1996:  black looks are dominant while other looks are recessive.  Observation seems to bear this out.  A person with only 1/16th black ancestry will still often have visible black characteristics, whereas a white person with 1/16th Japanese ancestry would probably pass for 100% white.

In other words, the reason why most mulattoes identify as black is at least in part biological.  Perhaps the white phenotype really is recessive and is easily diminished.

As philosopher Nick Land succinctly formulated: White + Color = Color.


Razib Khan:  European Americans have little African ancestry

Dienekes Pontikos: “23&Me: Less than 5% of European Americans have more than 2% either African or Native American ancestry

Steve Sailer:  “White Americans are VERY white

Penis Snathcing on the Rise in Africa

In other news, penis snatching is on the rise in Africa.  While Europeans have quaint hobbies like stamp collecting and bird watching, Africans have penis snatching.


The Malleus Maleficarum reference is gratuitous political correctness, as it’s the equivalent of “Evidence of UFO’s” manual for 15th century Europe. As far as I know, there is no real evidence of widespread penis snatching in 15th century Europe.  If it truly were widespread, it would be widely documented.

There might very well be a primitive drive for penis snatching.  When a rising alpha chimpanzee overthrows a reigning alpha, he sometimes will tear off his testicles and penis.  (See here, here and here.)

Are Sub-Sahara Africans Part Mangani?

NBC reports:

“Scientists say an African-American male’s odd genetic signature suggests that the human Y chromosome’s lineage goes back further in time than they thought — perhaps due to interbreeding with other populations such as Neanderthals.”

It probably isn’t Neanderthal, since most Neanderthal DNA seems to be in Europeans and North Asians, nor Denisovan, since their legacy seems primarily to lie with Melanesians and Australian Aborigines.  It’s possibly another unknown hominin in Africa, which might be associated with in some way what Gregory Cochran has joked that we should call Mangani.  (Peter Frost here speculates on African admixture with various archaic hominins.)

Mangani Sketch

The NBC article continues:

That goes further back than the fossil record goes for anatomically modern humans, Hammer said. “The fossil record speaks to 195,000 years or 200,000 years,” he said. It also goes further back than the previous date for the most recent common ancestor based on Y-chromosome analysis, which is in the range of 142,000 years….

Melissa Wilson Sayres, a geneticist at the University of California at Berkeley who played no role in Hammer’s study, said the new findings were “exciting” because they pointed to a Y-chromosome lineage more ancient than any others. “They just happened to come across this one Y chromosome that was hidden for so long, and it’s very likely that there are more hidden Y chromosomes around the world,” she told NBC News.

She said one of the biggest debates in the study of human genetics has to do with how to match mutation rates with time scales — and she expects this latest study to add to the debate. For example, some might continue to argue that the most recent common ancestor lived more recently than 338,000 years ago. “It will still be the oldest Y-chromosome heritage that we have, but I can foresee that some people might disagree with that specific age,” she said.

In the long term, this might refine our understanding of genetic distances (and genetic lineages) among the races – in that the various races are not even completely the same species.  As Cavalli-Sforza’s team found:

“Cavalli-Sforza’s team compiled extraordinary tables depicting the “genetic distances” separating 2,000 different racial groups from each other. For example, assume the genetic distance between the English and the Danes is equal to 1.0. Then, Cavalli-Sforza has found, the separation between the English and the Italians would be about 2.5 times as large as the English-Danish difference. On this scale, the Iranians would be 9 times more distant genetically from the English than the Danish, and the Japanese 59 times greater. Finally, the gap between the English and the Bantus (the main group of sub-Saharan blacks) is 109 times as large as the distance between the English and the Danish.”

Will these distances even widen in a conceptual sense as we find out about new lineages?